You seem to have misunderstood my question in so much as I was referring to theology in a broader context. Rather than Fluxus relating to religion as external and separate, my question was more to do with the notion of Fluxus having its own ‘theology’ or put another way, its own religious-like belief system – and I suppose there is the implied question also, is it one to which you adhere. For example, contemporary understandings of ‘wilderness’, and the belief systems that support them, are , arguably, a theology or at least a quasi theology. Do you think that might be the case in so far as your understanding of, and engagement with, Fluxus is concerned?
It’s a pity you’ll not be going to see the original Kincaid work as quite probably you would be able to report back to people such as myself who are far removed from such opportunities. I would be very interested in any position you might have arrived at after being presented with the ‘original’ and especially so in regard to
- the extent to which you might judge the work to be kitsch
- how his work might be modified to become <FLUXUSwork> and/or
- who you think might be capable of achieving this.
Ray _from way out on the edge
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (when the server’s up)
On 11/7/04 10:14 PM, "secret fluxus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear Ray,
Secret Fluxus had a short dinner meeting last night in the intervals between
different holiday schedules.
I had a chance to collect our email before the meeting, and I?ll respond to
the questions that have popped up over the past week.
We?ve been thinking about the comments on our style that Allan Revich wrote.
We developed this in relation to the issue of anonymity, and we are working
our way toward a new approach. I?m not sure what kind of style we ought to
have. Some of us are more formal than others. We have a way to deal with
this challenge while remaining anonymous.
We have decided to use artist names, the artist equivalent of an author?s
nom de plume. In this way, we can each develop a personality and style that
suits us while remaining anonymous to anyone outside the group. This may not
be an entirely satisfactory solution, but we think it will allow us some new
approaches.
We don?t yet have our new names, so I?ll be signing this as The Man Without
a Name. Once we decide how to approach the issue, those of us who wish to
seek a new style will be free to do so. We also agreed that the ability to
sign as an individual will permit us to write to others by name. This, in
itself, will change the tone of our correspondence.
And now, the answers to your questions
The first question is difficult to answer. What is our location? Where do we
believe that Fluxus is located? Please give us time to think this through.
The second question is easy for us to answer. We don?t feel constrained by
Fluxus or by the rules we have created for our work together. We are free to
do what we will. Any one of us is free to establish his or her own rules or
conditions for anything he or she may do outside the group. We are free to
change our group rules whenever we wish.
We haven?t really given much thought to the ways in which Fluxus may or may
not be related to theology. Ken Friedman once intended a career in the
Unitarian ministry. We have passed your question on to him. Perhaps his
answer will help us to think the matter though.
It is easy to answer the question on Thomas Kincaid. We?re not going to see
the Kincaid exhibition. Kincaid may interest someone. He doesn?t interest
us.
Sincerely,
The Man Without a Name
Re: FLUXLIST: Position on the State of Fluxus
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 01:04:30 +1000
From: Ray Noman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: Position on the State of Fluxus
I?m finding this evolving dialogue with "Secret Fluxus" quite fascinating
and there seems to be a tension between the US & UK speakers/writers to do
with appropriate forms of language, it?s <FLUXUSintegrity> etc. There is a
question I wonder about in relation to the group! I wonder if the the group
has addressed the issue of their ( I suppose it is really it?s rather that
their) placedness. Like do they collectively or individually see themselves
as global citizen? British? Londoners? What? Is it an issue that has any
importance to them? And further to that, where do they imagine/understand
FLUXUS to be placed/located? Or indeed, where do others on the list think
FLUXUS is located in a contemporary context?
Ray _from way out on the edge
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (when the server?s up)
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 21:53:30 +1000
From: Ray Noman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FLUXLIST: A living, breathing, and constantly evolving entity
Secret Fluxus,
Perhaps you should be aware that your group isn?t the only ?secret fluxus?
group in operation right now. There is, out here at the edge, <sFt>
<sectretFLUXUStrevallyn> that in a way is a kind of <ZENzing>
group/chapter/auxiliary as well. In any event <sFt> was inspired by your
group albeit that it?s reasons for electing to be ?secret? are quite
different as there is a <FLUXUStrevallyn> that is open and upfront about
what it does/they do, together. I?ve been relaying selected FLUXLIST
postings to a group of colleagues/friends/associates for sometime and as a
result two informal groups have somewhat spontaneously ?congealed? with
quite different alliances albeit that all are known to each other ? as
visual artists, designers, teachers, youth workers, restaurateurs,
musicians, academics, bureaucrats et al - It?s more the authorship of their
actions that?s secret than the membership.
To cut to the chase <sFt> (btw this is the new ?tag? the group has adopted)
has opted to operate as a kind of mild cultural gorilla action group
producing <FLUXUSlike> ?works? at a very local level. It would be true to
say that this group/alliance was inspired by the possibilities FLUXUS opened
up for them in a very local context. They elected to go with FLUXUS
identification in honour of their inspiration but have resolved not to be
constrained by it. While I am not directly a part of the group _ <sFt> _ I
have facilitated putting some of their stuff out there when asked. While
<FLUXUStrevallyn> shared some membership for a while it is transmogrifying
into something quite distinct, and local, and in ways that may mean that as
a group it may well drop the <FLUXUStag> albeit FLUXUS is ever likely to be
an important inspiration - it may even delaminate into simply a network of
cooperating individuals. There is a state of FLUX in operation.
I say all this to put this question that has been a subject of discussion in
the group(s) for a while into some kind of context. And, if it was answered
from Secret Fluxus?s position it would be quite interesting for most in the
group.
Has Secret Fluxus ever considered its position as being one related to
theology? And here ?theology? should be understood in its broadest context.
I expect that you may not find the question relevant to you in any way but
that would be as interesting as any position you individually or the
group/collective may have adopted.
Ray _4 <sFt> & <Ft> & myself =AD from way out here on the edge
eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 14:24:41 +1000
From: Ray Noman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: <NEWSflash> FLUXLIST: For Kincaid fans
Channel 4 has just run a news item on THOMAS KINKADE (albeit a bit tongue in
cheek, John Snow the presenter is very droll), and guess what? There?s this
guy in London who?s opened up 5 galleries selling exclusively Kinkade
merchandise, and he?s about to open another two, AND.......HE?S A SCOT!!!!
Perhaps Secret Fluxus. or someone, could go and check them out for us al and
report back after they?ve met in a restaurant and worked some butter and
eggs while wearing a kilt.
_________________________________________________________________
Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger
